Robert, in reference to ARMAGEDDON: You didn't miss a damn thing. Imagine a movie as bad as SANTA CLAUS CONQUERS THE MARTIANS, but with a budget bigger than Slovakia's GDP. What Mike Nelson has called a Big Gulp movie. Big, loud crappy movies with lots of stuff in them.

I go thru phases where I rewatch a film all week, captivated by parts or technical elements, and CHINATOWN was a recent one. This is one where disagreements between director and writer then writer and director really paid off.

BUTCH CASSIDY, while not really knocking it I've never gotten into either.

Because of the yet-another crack at America's Godzilla, I revisited the original last night. The section alone where the fight between Ogata and Serizawa is juxtaposed with the huge choir of Japanese children delivers emotional impact no other outing can touch. I've seen this movie more times than I can count and the effect is the same for me every time.

We saw the new Godzilla flick the other day. Liked it. I'm not going to convince anybody it was a "great film". However, the people involved clearly took the project seriously, and as big (emphasis on BIG) as the special effects were, they were only taken as far as necessary to convey that seriousness and complement the story, and the nicely paced slow-burn plot lumbered on successfully. In other words, there really is a story there, the point of the movie WAS the story, the special effects enhanced rather than belabored the telling, and in the end the special effects were at the root of a friggin' amazing cinematic conclusion. It was fun. Popcorn fare, but VERY good popcorn fare.

We don't stop playing because we grow old.We grow old because we stop playing.-- George Bernard Shaw

I don't care much for the monster's design, but I do like hearing there's a story. So many things that hold me to the original: keeping the creature out of sight for half the flick, only to hear its ominous thunder in the distance; the film's story structure (opening in the middle, cutting to flashback, returning to present time for the climax); the emotional power in the Oppenheimer reference. For myself, very hard to beat that. Still, I'll eventually check out the new one, though I may have to wait for the dvd.

Keeping in mind I am the world's biggest Godzilla fan, a connoisseur , a fanatic, a bona-fide G snob (such things do indeed exist - pleased to meet you). I thought the '97 outing worse than 49 lashes with the cat 'o nine tails, and that last Toho outing worse than that. So I went into the new one with both excitement and trepidation.

The new one. . .

Is Okay. Not a bad movie. Not noticeably amateurish. And the monster, once he does appear, is pretty cool.

When he does appear.

See, the thing with monster movies is, they're supposed to be about MONSTERS. I do not go to such a Godzilla flick to see actors admiring his footprints. I want to see him bloody well making the footprints! Alas, too much of the film was just waiting for Big-G to make an appearance, and when he finally does appear, he goes away again. It gets really, really aggravating at times.

I dunno, man. Actors examining his footprints...that's what they did in the first one. I like Gojira because of its approach. It takes its time. They keep the beast out of sight until the middle. You only hear it. That and it's allegory, using an Oppenheimer character, makes the original kick ass.

Don't let Tony Isabella read that. He would insist you join the FIRST CHURCH OF GODZILLA to prove your mettle, and if you came up lacking...well, the punishment makes even the Inquisition look tolerant.

Personally, I prefer Rodan.

- I love to find adventure. All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

I dunno, man. Actors examining his footprints...that's what they did in the first one. I like Gojira because of its approach. It takes its time. They keep the beast out of sight until the middle. You only hear it. That and it's allegory, using an Oppenheimer character, makes the original kick ass.

Yep, that's exactly what they tried to recapture in the new one, that slow burn I mentioned, even so far as using a powerful Oppenheimer quote to start it off. I think they paid a very sincere and generous homage to the original, with a serious (by movie scientific standards) modern plot, without trying to reinvent it completely. I liked it. I thought it was great fun. Once again, not a "great" film, nothing to knock CITIZEN CANE off its pedestal, but an honestly entertaining movie that never descended into the "it's all about the FX" trap. Steve doesn't like the slow burn, he wants more big G right off the top, but that's not how the original did it, and that's not how this one did it. In this case, I got what I wanted (in a script, or whatever), but Steve didn't. One size does NOT fit all, but the fabric and stitching are wonderful...I'll buy that T-shirt any day.

We don't stop playing because we grow old.We grow old because we stop playing.-- George Bernard Shaw